Existing law makes it a crime to knowingly or willfully cause another person to engage in the unlawful manufacture of firearms or knowingly or willfully aiding, abetting, prompting, or facilitating the unlawful manufacture of firearms, including the manufacture of assault weapons or .50 BMG rifles or the manufacture of any firearm using a 3-dimensional printer, as specified. Existing law authorizes a civil action against a person who knowingly distributes or causes to be distributed any digital firearm manufacturing code to any person, except as specified. Existing law authorizes the Attorney General, county counsel, or city attorney to bring an action against this person and seek a civil penalty, as specified, for each violation, as well as injunctive relief. This bill would require the Department of Justice to check on a quarterly basis beginning no later than July 1, 2027, whether ASTM International has published industry standards for equipping 3-dimensional printers with firearm blocking technology. The bill would require, if the department determines that ASTM International has published or adopted industry standards for firearm blocking technology for 3-dimensional printers, that the department publish written guidance or regulations within 24 months after making that determination. The bill would require, among other things, the written guidance or regulations to describe minimum performance standards for 3-dimensional printer firearm blocking technology before a printer can lawfully be sold or offered for sale in the state. If, as of July 1, 2029, the department determines that ASTM International has not published industry standards for firearm blocking technology for 3-dimensional printers, the bill would relieve the department of any further responsibility to ascertain whether ASTM International has published or adopted industry standards. The bill would make it unlawful to sell, offer for sale, or transfer for consideration, a 3-dimensional printer in the State of California that is not equipped with firearm blocking technology that also meets the above-described industry standards. The bill would exempt printers used exclusively for the manufacturing of properties (props) in the entertainment industry, and would authorize the department to adopt regulations that provide for additional exceptions to these provisions. This bill would also exempt a person who distributes, or causes the distribution of, digital firearm manufacturing code, solely for the bona fide purpose of, among other things, developing, refining, and testing the functionality of a firearm blocking technology from civil liability. This bill would make these provisions severable.
Existing law establishes the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement within the Department of Industrial Relations. Existing law authorizes the division, which is headed by the Labor Commissioner, to enforce the Labor Code and all labor laws of the state, the enforcement of which is not specifically vested in any other officer, board, or commission. This bill would, with certain exceptions, prohibit an employer from using a workplace surveillance tool that uses artificial intelligence to, among other things, collect neural data or recognize an individual's emotional state. The bill would define an employer to include a governmental entity, including, among other entities, charter cities and the University of California. This bill would authorize the Labor Commissioner or a public prosecutor to enforce the bill's provisions. The bill would subject an employer who violates the bill's provisions to a civil penalty of up to $500 for each violation. The bill would define various terms for purposes of its provisions. This bill would exempt from its provisions an employer's use of a workplace surveillance tool in specified operations where the use of a workplace surveillance tool is reasonable necessary to comply with a federal statute, federal regulation, or binding federal contract relating to the development of aircraft for use in the national airspace or the development of products or services for national security, military, space, or defense purposes. The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities.
The California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (CCPA) grants a consumer various rights with respect to personal information, as defined, that is collected or sold by a business, as defined, including the right to direct a business that collects sensitive personal information, as defined, about the consumer to limit its use, as prescribed. The California Privacy Rights Act of 2020, approved by the voters as Proposition 24 at the November 3, 2020, statewide general election, amended, added to, and reenacted the CCPA. This bill would, under the CCPA, prohibit a business, service provider, or contractor from selling or sharing sensitive personal information to a third party, except as specified. This bill would declare that its provisions further the purposes and intent of the California Privacy Rights Act of 2020.
Existing law establishes various healing arts boards within the Department of Consumer Affairs that license and regulate various healing arts licensees. Existing laws, including the Licensed Marriage and Family Therapist Act, the Educational Psychologist Practice Act, the Clinical Social Worker Practice Act, and the Licensed Professional Clinical Counselor Act, make a violation of those acts a crime. Existing law regulates the use of artificial intelligence, as defined. Existing law requires a health facility, clinic, physician's office, or office of a group practice that uses generative artificial intelligence to generate written or verbal patient communications pertaining to patient clinical information to ensure those communications include a disclaimer that indicates to the patient that a communication was generated by artificial intelligence and instructions describing how a patient may contact a human health care provider, employee, or other appropriate person. This bill would regulate the use of artificial intelligence in connection with providing or facilitating psychotherapy services, as defined. The bill, among other things, would authorize an individual, corporation, or entity that provides or facilitates psychotherapy services to use artificial intelligence tools or systems only to assist in providing administrative or supplementary support in psychotherapy services, as specified. The bill would prohibit an individual, corporation, or entity from using artificial intelligence to record or transcribe psychotherapeutic communications or sessions or to triage or screen a person for the need for psychotherapy services unless the patient or client or their authorized representative is informed that artificial intelligence will be used and the purpose of the artificial intelligence tool or system, and the patient or client or their authorized representative provides consent, as specified. The bill would prohibit an individual, corporation, or entity from advertising or otherwise purporting to offer psychotherapy services when the services are provided through the use of companion chatbots. The bill would prohibit an individual, corporation, or entity from allowing artificial intelligence to perform certain acts, including making therapeutic decisions or detecting emotions or mental states, as specified, without review and approval by a licensed professional. The bill would make a violation of the bill's provisions subject to the jurisdiction of the appropriate health care professional licensing board or enforcement agency, as specified, and would authorize those boards and enforcement entities to pursue any remedies authorized by law. Existing law, the Confidentiality of Medical Information Act, generally restricts the persons and entities to whom, and the purposes for which, a health care provider, health care service plan, or contractor may release a patient's medical information. The Confidentiality of Medical Information Act additionally imposes certain disclosure requirements for the release of medical information that specifically relates to the patient's participation in outpatient treatment with a psychotherapist. In this regard, the act prohibits a health care provider, health care service plan, or contractor from releasing that information to persons or entities who have requested that information and who are otherwise authorized by specified laws to receive that information, unless the requester makes certain written disclosures to the patient and to the provider of health care, health care service plan, or contractor, as specified. Those disclosures include, among other things, the specific intended uses of the information, and the length of time during which the information will be kept before being destroyed or disposed of, as specified. Existing law makes a violation of those provisions that result in economic loss or personal injury to a patient punishable as a misdemeanor. This bill would require the use of artificial intelligence in patient or client records for psychotherapy services to comply with the confidentiality requirements of the above-described provision of the Confidentiality of Medical Information Act and would prohibit a company or entity from sharing, selling, storing, or training their models on any data obtained from psychotherapy in a manner inconsistent with any applicable law. By expanding the scope of existing crimes, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law establishes the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement within the Department of Industrial Relations. Existing law authorizes the division, which is headed by the Labor Commissioner, to enforce the Labor Code and all labor laws of the state the enforcement of which is not specifically vested in any other officer, board, or commission. This bill would limit the use of workplace surveillance tools, as defined, by employers, including by prohibiting an employer from monitoring or surveilling employees in a bathroom located in the workplace, except as specified. The bill would provide an employee with the right to leave behind workplace surveillance tools that are on their person or in their possession when entering a bathroom, except as specified. This bill would authorize the commissioner to enforce the bill's provisions, as prescribed, and would authorize a public prosecutor to bring specified enforcement actions. The bill would subject an employer who violates the bill to a civil penalty of up to $500 for each violation. The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities.
Existing law prohibits a person, other than a provider of electronic or wire communication service for specified purposes, from installing or using a pen register or a trap and trace device, as those terms are defined, without first obtaining a court order. Existing law authorizes a person who has been injured by a violation of that prohibition to bring an action against the person who committed the violation to enjoin and restrain the violation, as well as to bring an action for monetary damages, as specified. This bill would instead authorize only the Attorney General to bring that action for a violation of the above-described provision if the action is alleged to arise from conduct occurring on an internet website, online application, or mobile application. The bill would provide that this limitation applies retroactively to any pending claim in an action commenced within 2 years before the operative date of the bill. The bill would declare the severability of its provisions.
California Assembly Resolution 140 designates August 2026 as Children's Get Offline and Get Outdoors Month to promote awareness of the benefits of screen-free play for child development. The resolution cites research linking excessive social media use and reduced free play time to increased rates of anxiety, depression, and other behavioral issues among teenagers. It encourages families and communities to support unstructured outdoor activities and highlights ongoing federal efforts to protect children's mental health through technology guardrails.
Existing law requires the governing board of a school district, a county board of education, and the governing body of a charter school to, no later than July 1, 2026, develop and adopt, and update every 5 years, a policy to limit or prohibit the use by its pupils of smartphones while the pupils are at a schoolsite or while the pupils are under the supervision and control of an employee or employees of that local educational agency. Under existing law, a pupil shall not be prohibited from possessing or using a smartphone under specified circumstances, including, among others, when the possession or use of a smartphone is required in a pupil's individualized education program. This bill, commencing July 1, 2028, would require the above-described policy to continue to apply only to pupils in any of grades 9 to 12, inclusive. The bill would require the governing board of a school district, a county board of education, and the governing body of a charter school that serves pupils in transitional kindergarten, kindergarten, or grades 1 to 8, inclusive, to, no later than July 1, 2028, develop and adopt a policy that prohibits the use of smartphones by those pupils while the pupils are at a schoolsite or while the pupils are under the supervision and control of an employee or employees of that local educational agency, as provided. The bill, commencing July 1, 2028, would prohibit instruction provided to pupils in transitional kindergarten, kindergarten, and any of grades 1 to 8, inclusive, from requiring the use of a smartphone by a pupil. The bill, commencing January 1, 2027, would require (1) a pupil in any grade to also be allowed to possess or use a smartphone when the possession or use of a smartphone is required in a pupil's plan developed pursuant to the federal Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and (2) a policy adopted or updated pursuant to these provisions be included in a pupil handbook, if one is provided. By imposing additional duties on local educational agencies, the bill would constitute a state-mandated local program. This bill would require the State Department of Education, on or before January 1, 2029, to submit to the appropriate policy and fiscal committees of the Legislature, and post on their internet website, a report that contains (1) a description of the pupil smartphone policies of at least 30 selected local educational agencies that have provided consent to participate and that are representative of the demographic and geographic diversity of the state, including a copy of each policy, as provided, (2) the results of a survey of those local educational agencies, which the bill would require the department to conduct, and (3) recommended best practices for future local educational agency pupil smartphone use policies. The bill would authorize the department to collaborate with specified organizations with relevant expertise in preparing the report. The bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2033. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
The California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (CCPA) grants to a consumer various rights with respect to personal information that is collected by a business, including the right to delete personal information. The California Privacy Rights Act of 2020, approved by the voters as Proposition 24 at the November 3, 2020, statewide general election, amended, added to, and reenacted the CCPA and establishes the California Privacy Protection Agency and vests the agency with full administrative power, authority, and jurisdiction to enforce the CCPA. The CCPA excludes from the definition of "personal information" publicly available information. Existing law defines "publicly available" for these purposes to include 3 types of information. One type is information that a business has a reasonable basis to believe is lawfully made available to the general public by the consumer or from widely distributed media. This bill would revise that part of the definition of "publicly available" by removing the condition that the business have a reasonable basis to believe the information is lawfully made available. The CCPA also includes in that definition of "publicly available" information made available by a person to whom the consumer has disclosed the information if the consumer has not restricted the information to a specific audience. This bill would delete that part of the definition of "publicly available." This bill would declare that its provisions further the purposes and intent of the California Privacy Rights Act of 2020.
This House Resolution from the California Legislature calls for a federal review of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996. The bill argues that the current law, which protects online platforms from liability for third-party content, has become outdated and allows major technology companies to avoid responsibility for harmful user-generated material. It highlights that courts have used this provision to shield platforms from legal action in cases involving harassment, illegal sales, and other serious harms. The resolution contends that the law should be reformed to hold companies accountable for their design choices and content moderation practices while still encouraging them to remove objectionable material.
